usbmon is truncated, and the final image is necessary to determine top vs bottom, left vs right, etc. So we need a wireshark and an image from the same scan.
allan On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 9:45 PM Mayuresh <mayur...@acm.org> wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 13, 2020 at 05:08:31PM -0500, m. allan noah wrote: > > I don't see anything immediately obvious in the protocol, but we > > really need to see some scans. Even without the xray source we may > > learn something. But certainly the xray source, and the final image > > produced by the windows software will be required to be sure. > > Right now I am having the attached usbmon output where 2 back to back > snaps (x rays) were taken. This one has missed some initial part which is > present in the previous snaps (wireshark and usbmon) that I attached. > > The final image produced by windows software is probably not of much use > for the protocol for 1. It is compressed while the device returns raw. > Both snaps consistently show 3648832 bytes were returned as bulk out by > the device while the final images are around 1MB. 2. It adds additional > information such as patient name, date etc which is not really coming from > the device. So wireshark/usbmon may offer better clues than image produced > by the windows software. > > Will try and share the image over some time. -- "well, I stand up next to a mountain- and I chop it down with the edge of my hand"